There's no reason to accept the claim of god without evidence. Therefor Atheist is the default position. If you can't back it up then if you're after the truth the next step would be to walk away, aka become a non believer, an atheist. Until such a time as evidence would suggest otherwise. Which is the point. Theists claim to be after the truth but can't even consider they may be wrong, there's no search for truth in that, only confirmation bias.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.

(13-03-2017 08:13 PM)hecrow55 Wrote: There would have be significant evidence to show there is no God.

No. The onus is on believers to provide evidence that is up to our standards. We don't have to provide any evidence at all, as it's perfectly reasonable to reject claims of things that we consider ridiculous.

Quote:One did ask me what would it take for me to stop believing in Christ and I told him to prove one thing accredited to Jesus is a lie. If it can be shown thaT He lied, then He could not be the Christ.

Personally, I think that "the Christ" is a fictional character that may or may not be based on a wholly mortal rabbi (or a composite of several rabbis) who preached in Roman-occupied Judea. Any real persons upon whom the Jesus myth was based are now quite thoroughly dead, and expected to remain so in perpetuity.

I'm sorry, but your beliefs are much too silly to take seriously. Got anything else we can discuss?

(13-03-2017 08:19 PM)JesseB Wrote: There's no reason to accept the claim of god without evidence. Therefor Atheist is the default position. If you can't back it up then if you're after the truth the next step would be to walk away, aka become a non believer, an atheist. Until such a time as evidence would suggest otherwise. Which is the point. Theists claim to be after the truth but can't even consider they may be wrong, there's no search for truth in that, only confirmation bias.

The default position for me is to search for the evidence, not to demand it from others. I have more than enough evidence to convince me but it would not be accepted as such by y'all, so there is no use to share that.

(13-03-2017 08:19 PM)JesseB Wrote: There's no reason to accept the claim of god without evidence. Therefor Atheist is the default position. If you can't back it up then if you're after the truth the next step would be to walk away, aka become a non believer, an atheist. Until such a time as evidence would suggest otherwise. Which is the point. Theists claim to be after the truth but can't even consider they may be wrong, there's no search for truth in that, only confirmation bias.

The default position for me is to search for the evidence, not to demand it from others. I have more than enough evidence to convince me but it would not be accepted as such by y'all, so there is no use to share that.

In that event you still need a starting point, try to Google the null hypothesis. Perhaps then you will see my point.

There's no reason to accept anything without evidence, the Atheist does not say "There is no god" the Atheist says "There's not enough evidence for a god for me to think there is a god" This extends to everything supernatural, why? cause there's no evidence to support the claims.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.

(13-03-2017 08:19 PM)JesseB Wrote: There's no reason to accept the claim of god without evidence. Therefor Atheist is the default position. If you can't back it up then if you're after the truth the next step would be to walk away, aka become a non believer, an atheist. Until such a time as evidence would suggest otherwise. Which is the point. Theists claim to be after the truth but can't even consider they may be wrong, there's no search for truth in that, only confirmation bias.

The default position for me is to search for the evidence, not to demand it from others. I have more than enough evidence to convince me but it would not be accepted as such by y'all, so there is no use to share that.

You have nothing. You chose to accept dot-connected random sentences and tell yourself you have evidence as you need to do that. It's not about the evidence. It's about your biased preconceptions and your need.

Insufferable know-it-all. God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.

(13-03-2017 08:13 PM)hecrow55 Wrote: There would have be significant evidence to show there is no God.

Then this would apply to Zeus, Thor, Kali, Vishna, Faeries, Unicorns, etc.

The default position is unbelief.

(13-03-2017 08:13 PM)hecrow55 Wrote: Most scientist and mathematicians I have either talked to or read about on this subject say that it cannot be proved one way or the other.

That's because it is almost impossible to prove a negative.

You're repeating the same bullshit. Previously, I challenged you:

Prove you are not a thief.

(13-03-2017 08:13 PM)hecrow55 Wrote: One did ask me what would it take for me to stop believing in Christ and I told him to prove one thing accredited to Jesus is a lie. If it can be shown thaT He lied, then He could not be the Christ.

He said the mustard seed was the smallest seed in all the earth.Mark 4:31 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth

I ment abraham. Think like this a pastor lady who gave me my prophecies told us about her story when another lady told her she would become a preacher someday. She said ill be in the club till I die. She got breast cancer survived and now a preacher.